Political Theory - Rationalizing the current global climate
Today I will attempt to identify the most common misconception that both left and right political ideologies believe in.
A hot topic of conversation this year has been global politics. We've seen a lot of political movements, from both sides of the spectrum. What we're lacking however is rational discussion from those that do not have an agenda.
Given the political influences in my life, I naturally swayed to the left side of the spectrum. I've since learned recently however, that neither side is correct.
Let me explain.
Political Contradictions
A lot of modern Liberals today wish for revolution, and yet they do not understand exactly what that entails. And, a lot of modern Conservatists wish for things to remain the same, despite corruption and suffering. Both sides have become unreasonable and irrational.
Both groups have become radical with their political position. Unwilling to reason with the other, both groups fail to see compromise as they believe their solution is greater. They therefore create a division between themselves that contradicts both of their positions entirely.
When reaching a solution one must find common ground. When it comes to left & right politics, common ground is found through virtue. Neither group can deny that killing is evil and that giving is good. Yet, both groups are willing to engage in evil to bring about good. That is where their political position is contradictory.
A party can not lead if they are unwilling to stay true to their virtues.
Corruption
If you disagree with these virtues and believe that killing is necessary, you probably need a psyche evaluation before you murder someone. Killing is fundamentally evil. Ending life is easier than creating life. It is weak and has inevitable consequences.
Which brings me back to left & right. To continue the path that we are currently leading is to continue perpetual war. Wars of all kinds are continually waged by Conservatist leaders that wish to protect what already is. Monetary wars, race wars, drug wars, and even religious wars. These wars are fueled by corrupt politics.
To bring about revolution is the same. In order for "revolution" one must destroy everything in order to rebuild it again in their image. This is a destructive stance that involves the same perpetuity of war.
The underlying problem with these two political ideologies is not caused by their policies but is instead caused by corruption.
Standing on Shaky Grounds
Both parties beliefs are equivocal. They believe that radical stances must be taken to provide for the greater good, despite the amount of corruption it may take to achieve their goals. For example, we believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, so a coalition of international armies invaded Iraq, declared war, and killed over 1 million citizens in the process. No weapons of mass destruction were ever found.
In that instance, democratic leaders were willing to sacrifice the morality of democracy in order to protect the greater good. They were willing to slaughter any potential threat despite creating a somewhat totalitarian regime in the area. The effects of this war have lead to destabilization in the entire middle east and the creation of radical Islam.
Now I know we can assume conspiratorial positions on other reasons as to why we invaded Iraq, but the fact of the matter is that we as an international body became corrupt. We were willing to indulge in evil to bring about good which undermines the virtues of democracy.
There is no way to fight an opposition without indulging in primal evil. If you use force when assuming your position you become an aggressor. You become the enemy to the person you're becoming aggressive toward. You become the evil that you opposed to begin with.
Finding Common Ground
The solution is more simple than we think. In order to avoid corruption and unify both parties we must first rectify our morality through education. Our virtues are the basis for social cohesion. No matter which religious text you study, it teaches you that, what is good is what brings us together, as a society. Our need to be good is far greater than our need for evil.
We no longer need to divide ourselves through race and creed. These ideals only exist because of historical disputes. These historical disputes only continue because we choose too. If we were to walk away from conflict and instead ignore the negative aggressors, they would become powerless. We give evil power when we choose to indulge in it. We can instead choose to educate ourselves in order to find a better solution.
Conclusion
Corruption within left & right political ideologies has warped the true purpose of their inception; to create a better world. If we are to go back in time to the theories of political philosophers such as Aristotle and Plato, both suggest that no political ideology is complete and that they each have their faults. This means that the correct way of governing ourselves is undetermined.
If we are to move forward then we should become better as individuals. If we are unwilling to engage in rational conversation regarding politics then we are not ready to engage in such. Only once we are able to entertain thought, whether we accept it or not, are we able to compromise with one and other to create real solutions. Create change through yourself first so that you can be the change you wish to see in the world, just as Ghandi most famously said.
I have strayed a little further toward individualism in this post more than I set out too but it is the most achievable solution to our uncompromising diversification. And, if you're to take anything from this, choose to be a positive light in the discussions ahead. It is possible that the corruption of a few will have great effects on us all in the future. If we choose to be individuals, both learning and teaching, we can eventually create a society that works.
There are many more things that I would like to add here, but for now I hope I have addressed the main contradictions between left & right politics. I have tried to take a neutral stance in this article and believe I have done so. Take from this article what you will.
Thanks for reading.
Born in New Zealand and resides in Australia, Thomas writes about many different subjects, mostly about those that affect him at the time. He likes to philosophize about each subject and does the same in his music. Addicted to knowledge though no scholar, Thomas tries to be original & true in his quest to better himself.
Either, or. Society is bi-polar. You're either yes or no, never maybe. Left or right, never centered. Positive or negative, never balanced. Coke or Pepsi, never water. Red team or blue team, high or low... this goes on forever.
That little Energizer Bunny keeps going and going. The rabbit knows something we don't. The battery needs both the positive and the negative to have power. If the connection to either, or is lost, there is no charge. Society needs to become the battery.
Extend your arms out to your side. Which one are you? The left or the right? Easy to decide when that is all that one can see. What's in the middle? That's the part we need to be using.
I agree with the second part of your comment, but not the first. Balance is achieved through knowing and understanding. Both positives and negatives have their purpose, but neither is absolute.
Also, my arms, body and mind are one. I see a complete picture. What do you see?
I see people choosing sides through the vision of my complete picture. I don't need to be anything. I can just, be.
The balance does come from understanding. What is summer, without winter. I think I get it, my words don't always cooperate.
Just being is all that is needed of anyone. Understanding is needed if we wish to achieve more. Being aggressive is the unnecessary course of action. I think you understand just fine :)
I should be sleeping right now... It's 3 am and I'm rambling. Thanks for entertaining this present insomniac.
It's all in good fun. I try to go deep, but end up falling off the deep end. If I could simply project the thought over the internet, life would be easier. Of course, I had that sort of mind power, I'd probably be doing something else with it.
Rambling is healthy, but not at 3am. Try to get some sleep, man!
The problem is that left and right have often different morals, for example the right usually takes is morals form Christianity, while the left no. So even morality can't be a good common ground (at least is still very difficult).